President Barack
Obama proposed a one-year extension of Bush-era tax cuts for families earning
less than $250,000 a year but would let them rise for wealthier Americans, a
move that both shifts the election debate to tax rates and sets the table for a
showdown with Republicans in Congress.
Mr. Obama's move didn't break new policy
ground—he essentially repackaged his existing policy for the campaign season.
Nor is it likely to pave the way for action from a deeply divided Congress
already in the thrall of the campaign.
But by highlighting his desire for higher
taxes on upper-income Americans to deal with the deficit, and prompting
Republicans to reiterate their sharply different vision for lower rates for
all, Mr. Obama's move had the immediate effect of showing a clear partisan
contrast that had been obscured by the campaign focus on jobs.
It is a debate that will be resolved only
by voters—and perhaps by both parties' stated intention to move beyond the
argument about rates to a new discussion about fundamental tax overhaul after
the election.
Republican nominee-in-waiting Mitt Romney
has proposed lowering rates for all taxpayers as a way to spur the economy and
increase jobs. He wants to keep the Bush-era rates in place for everyone for
starters, and then would reduce those rates by another 20%. Some deductions would
be trimmed to offset the cost under Mr. Romney's plan, but he hasn't specified
which of them he would curb or eliminate.
Pitching his position as a proposal for
action by Congress in an election year, Mr. Obama moved to frame the tax debate
as one of fairness, calling for the wealthiest Americans to do their "fair
share" to pay down the deficit and help the nation invest for the future.
Mr. Romney responded in a radio interview:
"To add a higher tax on job creators and on small business is about the worst
thing I can imagine to do if you want to create jobs."
The White House said his plan would bring
in $65 billion in additional government revenue next year from higher taxes
paid by the top 2% of tax filers.
Under the Obama plan, the top marginal tax
rates would rise to 36% and 39.6%—up from the current 33% and 35%—on that
portion of adjusted gross income above the $250,000 threshold for families and
$200,000 for individuals.
The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center estimates
that roughly 1.25 million tax filers are in the brackets that would be
affected.
Mr. Obama's plan to extend the lower rates
for families earning less than $250,000 isn't expected to win the 60 votes
needed to pass in the Democratic-controlled Senate. And while Republicans are
likely to win passage in the House of a temporary extension of lower rates for
everyone, the measure is expected to then die in the Senate.
Democrats, including Sen. Charles Schumer
of New York and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California, earlier had
said the tax cuts should be extended for a larger group of the families—those
earning up to $1 million a year. But aides to both lawmakers said Monday they
support the Obama plan, and Mr. Schumer no longer plans to push for a vote on
the higher threshold.
Ultimately, the question of who should pay
more and who should pay less in taxes will come to a head at year's end, when
the Bush-era tax cuts are set to expire for all Americans.
A resolution isn't expected until after the
election, when voters will have chosen between Mr. Obama and Mr. Romney and
their starkly different tax plans.
Still, Mr. Obama insisted that the core of
what he was proposing—ensuring that taxes don't rise for most Americans next
year—was something both parties clearly agree on.
"Let's not hold the vast majority of
all Americans and our entire economy hostage while we debate the merits of
another tax cut for the wealthy," Mr. Obama said from the White House.
While the tax debate shows a stark divide
between the two presidential contenders and their parties, it also obscures a
potential area of quieter agreement between the sides. Both parties have said
they would like to see a comprehensive overhaul of the tax code, a matter that
could be on the congressional agenda for 2013.
If the tax debate takes that course, the
argument over rates could take a back seat to a broader discussion of the shape
of the tax code, the overall amount of revenue it brings to Washington and the
claim both parties make that they would, in general, like a system of lower
rates and fewer deductions and loopholes.
For now, the two presidential campaigns are
fleshing out details of different ways of coping with a system that both sides
agree needs to be addressed before the end of the year.
Mr. Obama would set new 30% minimum rate
for families earning more than $1 million—in addition to calling for higher
rates on families earning more than $250,000.
He also would lower the top corporate tax
rate to 28% from 35% and eliminate or limit a number of tax breaks.
In addition to proposing lowering all
individual income-tax rates and cutting or reducing deductions, Mr. Romney has
called for reducing the top corporate income-tax rate to 25%, eliminating the
estate tax and eliminating capital-gains taxes for families making less than
$200,000.
The tax question can't be avoided this year
because Mr. Obama and congressional Republicans agreed in December 2010 to
extend the Bush-era tax cuts through 2012 for all taxpayers, citing the need to
avoid disrupting the struggling economic recovery and the need to seek a
bipartisan agreement over how to proceed for the long run.
But Mr. Obama said at the time that he
wouldn't extend all the tax rates again, and on Monday his spokesman, Jay
Carney, promised the president would veto legislation being pushed in the House
that extends the lower rates for everyone again.
For Republicans, the tax debate offered a
fresh opportunity to argue that Mr. Obama's tax rates would hurt the economy
and, especially, small businesses.
"In the wake of another weak jobs
report, the president is doubling down on his quixotic call for the same small
businesses tax hikes that have been routinely rejected by the House and Senate,"
House Speaker John Boehner said in a statement.
Republicans said the Obama
proposal would raise taxes on some 940,000 people who report business income on
their taxes, a broad definition of small business.
The White House argues that even under this
definition, 97% of those filers earn less than $250,000 and would not be
affected. And White House officials say many of the people who are affected are
upper-income earners such as attorneys or hedge-fund managers.
No comments:
Post a Comment